I've had samples of the Histoires de Parfums line for years now. Since my acquisition, a number of newer perfumes have been released, but every now and then I revisit my samples and today I wore 1969 and 1740.
The strange thing is, to my mind, the associations with these two are slightly wrong. 1969 is meant to evoke the spirit of the end of the sixties, free love, and all that. Now, clearly I wasn't there (who was?), but based purely on my own associations of what I would have thought of the summer of love (albeit that was 1967 no?), I would have thought 1969 would be laden with patchouli, sandalwood perhaps, smokiness, a bit of unwashed skank and perhaps a hint of herby ganja. In fact, 1969 smells quite spicy, but mostly of cardamom and nutmeg, a whiff of citrus and some light woods. It is totally the opposite to what I would have expected (or liked).
1740 is inspired by the Maquis de Sade, and in a sense, this perfume does indeed have elements of what one might think of when conjuring up sadism, kinky sex, bondage, etc. It is laden with patchouli, and certainly has a heavy immortelle note too, to my nose. There is a hint of leather, but again, images of whips and sex paraphernalia might have inspired more of a raunchy leather note. To be honest, if my sample of 1740 had been mis-labelled 1969, I would have immediately thought that this was inspired by the free love of the sixties.
Ultimately, both fragrances are decent, but 1740 definitely appeals to me more.